About your Search

20130201
20130209
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
that is in serious, serious trouble of not moving forward to that cabinet nomination, i want to play what mr. brennan said defending drones, april 30th, 2012. let me play it, please. >> targeted strikes come form to the principle of humanity which requires us to use weapons that will not inflict unnecessary suffering. for all these reasons, i suggest to you that these targeted strikes against al qaeda terrorists are indeed ethical and just. >> if that is the answer we hear today from mr. brennan, what would your response be? >> well, look. every american deserves to see what the rules are. if we are saying we comply with the rule of law and the president said in the inauguration speech, people should know what the law is and the rules and law is hidden and just a tip of the iceberg they're looking at the justice department opinion. mr. brennan has put together an entire playbook and sounds like a video game and an entire playbook on when drones can be used and when they cannot be used and how the killing program will operate and something he just developed and sitting in the white house somewhere. th
year, mr. brennan called those legal, ethical and wise and the highest counterterrorism standard to limit the loss of civilian life. here's what he had to say in april of 2012. >> i stand here as someone who has been involved in our nation's security for more than 30 years. i have a profound appreciation for the truly remarkable capabilities of our counterterrorism professionals and our relationships with other nations and we must never compromise them. i will not discuss the sensitive details of any specific operation today. i will not, nor will i ever publicly divulge sensitive sources and methods, for when that happens our national security is endangered and lives could be lost. at the same time, we reject the notion that any discussion of these matters is a step on to a slippery slope that endanger our national security. too often, that fear can become an excuse for saying nothing at all, which creates a void that is then filled with myths and falsehoods. that, in turn, can erode our credibility with the american people and foreign partners and undermine the public's understa
for your introduction, if that is agreeable. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. i would like to welcome your family as well. i hope you will introduce them so the committee can give them its thanks. this is the first opportunity also to welcome our new members senator heinrich is on my right, senator king who is due any moment, senator collins on my left, and senator coburn, who is not here at the moment but who will be, who is returning to the committee. we have a new ex-officio member, senator inhofe. welcome to all of you. the director of the cia is among the most critical national security positions and the united states government. but because of the role the cia plays in collecting and analyzing intelligence relevant to every national security challenge we face and because of the added importance of having steady leadership at an organization that conducts most of its business outside of the public arena, intelligence is critical to the successful draw-down in afghanistan, to the brutal war going on in syria, across north africa where the attacks in benghazi and hostage
through the agency's ranks since of gates. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. senator warner has come in. i will make opening comments. the vice chairman will make opening, and then we will turn to you for your introduction if that is agreeable. mr. brennan, congratulations on your nomination. it is currently a lively. i would like to welcome your family as well. i am -- i hope you introduce them so the committee can give them its banks. this is the first opportunity to welcome our new members. senator heinrich who is on my right, sadr king, who is -- senator king, due any minute. senator collins and senator coburn who is not here but will be. we have a new? officio member, senator and half -- ex officio member, senator inhofe. because of the role the cia plays, collecting information. because of the added importance of having steady leadership at an organization that conducts most of its business outside of the public arena. intelligence is critical to the successful drawdown in afghanistan, to their brutal war going on within serious borders, across north africa where attac
for director of the c.i.a., mr. john brennan. he said, quote, hezbollah started out as purely a terrorist organization back in the early 1980's and has evolved significantly over time . and now it has members of parliament, in the cabinet, lawyers, doctors, others who are part of the hezbollah organization and so quite frankly i'm pleased to see that a lot of hezbollah individuals are in fact renouncing that type of terrorism and violence and are trying to participate in the political process in lebanon in a very legitimate fashion. they have not sworn off violence in lebanon. they have not sworn off violence in egypt, in syria, as we well know, in libya, albania, tuesday nearbyia -- tunesia, even in african nations further south. i said before, expressed my concern that this administration by helping them, encouraging them to overthrow this nation's ally, president mubarak, express concerns before it was done about giving military assistance to people that we knew, including al qaeda, to joe throw a man who had blood on his hands but since 2003 had been this nation's and this administrat
it as terrorist attack, and that was my view. >> and mr. brennan, who is going to be having a hearing later today that i won't be attending. i consider him to be one of the foremost intelligence experts around with twenty or twenty five years experience. would you agree with that? >> yes, indeed. >> he stated to me and will state again this afternoon the same thing you just said. that we realized at that moment it was a planned terrorist attack. now, the only question i want to ask you i'll ask you for an answer now and i doubt if you'll have a good answer. but after that i'd like to have you think about it and give an answer for the record. that is with everyone agreeing including the secretary clinton that right after this took place, that was in fact a planned terrorist attack. how in the world could ambassador rice say, quote, the information this is five days later -- the information the best information and the best assessment we have to date is that in fact this was not a preplained premeditated attack. >> no. again, i mean, i was not involved in the talking points. that were presented to
mind. >> they knew that at the time and unequivocally is a terrorist attack. do you agree, mr. secretary agree, mr. secretary, it was an attack on the annex? >> i said it was three days. >> that is what john brennan said also been used unequivocably. sometimes someone has to ask the question, if that was true with this presentation by susan rice, before all of america is the fact was it was not a preplanned or premeditated attack. i will not ask you to respond to that the people understand everybody knew that it was free planned and premeditated attack. >> senator reid. >> hq secretary, as you point* out there were two attacks one of the compound and one on the annex. but the time chart indicates there is a significant gap on the first at midnight and the appointment of mortars and rpg's did that indicate it took awhile to organize themselves to conduct a full blown attack that that with general dempsey they seized an opportunity then supplement the firepower coordinating attacks suggesting there was improvisation with the planning? >> the second was much more deliberate and p
have been a terrorist attack. and of course the thing i'm getting -- do you agree, mr. secretary, that it was unequivocally a terrorist attack on the annex? >> when i appeared before this committee three days afterwards i said it was a terrorist attack. >> very good. that's what john brennan said also. he used the word unequivocally. i would have to say we have to understand sometimes someone's going to have to ask the question, if that was true and we knew all that on the sunday this presentation by susan rice, for all of america, said it was -- we have today is that the fact is -- was, this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. unquote. i won't even ask you to respond to that but i think it's important that people understand that everybody knew on that sunday that it was a preplanned, premeditated attack. thank you for your tolerance, mr. chairman. >> senator reed. >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you, mr. secretary, and mr. dempsey. as you point out in your testimony, two attacks, one on the compound, one on the annex. but as the time chart indicates, there seems to be a
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)